Former ICAC head wants federal anti-graft body

Date – June 23, 2014 – Linton Besser

The recently retired head of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, David Ipp, QC, has called for the establishment of a federal anti-corruption agency with the powers of a standing royal commission, lamenting a grave ”breakdown of trust” in the political process.

Mr Ipp has also warned that Victoria’s anti-graft body, the Independent Broad Based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC), is weaker than its counterpart in NSW and therefore may be unable to unearth political corruption.

Mr Ipp’s comments to ABC’s Four Corners program come amid a sensational ICAC inquiry investigating the Liberal Party’s alleged laundering of illicit campaign finance by routing cheques via Canberra, where there is no dedicated corruption-busting agency.

Mr Ipp said the establishment of a federal anti-graft commission was ”very important”.

”There is no reason to believe that the persons who occupy seats in the Federal Parliament are inherently better than those who occupy seats in the NSW Parliament. Corruption is endemic to the human being.”

But Mr Ipp also said the creation of such an agency was unlikely.

”Most politicians … do not like to be subject to a body such as ICAC and you can see that in all the new similar bodies that have been created in South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania. They really do not have the [same] powers of investigation as ICAC and that is because politicians don’t want that.”

He said these other anti-corruption agencies would never have been able to uncover the Eddie Obeid plot that delivered his family $30 million from a rigged coal allocation tender in 2008.

”It would have been difficult for them, not because they don’t have the ability but because … it really did take the kind of powers that ICAC has to realise and prove the kind of corruption found.

”ICAC is able to uncover corruption which other bodies with similar names in other parts of Australia cannot uncover. Now the fact that they can’t uncover it doesn’t allow a person honestly to say there’s no corruption here.”

Victoria’s IBAC recently complained that restrictions around what it can investigate meant that some corruption allegations were not being probed. In April, Premier Denis Napthine said he would review changes to the integrity regime recommended by IBAC.

Emily Broadbent, a spokeswoman for federal Justice Minister Michael Keenan said the government ”is developing new anti-corruption measures.” She did not elaborate on what they might constitute.

Australia is a country of great racial diversity. You can see it in the faces of the people you work with. In the variety of religious and cultural events celebrated around the country: Chinese New Year, Diwali, Hanukkah, Ramadan and Christmas, to name a few.

However, the treatment of the Aboriginal peoples in this country stands as a chilling reminder that tolerance has not always been embraced. The Cronulla riots similarly remind us how quickly what we have achieved can be put at risk.

The proposed amendments to the act were put forward by federal Attorney-General George Brandis on the basis that the current wording of section 18C inappropriately constrains our freedom of speech.

The concept of freedom of speech is important – but it is important because of the role it plays in our democracy.

Freedom of speech ensures that when you or I go to the ballot box we can make an informed decision about who to vote for.

But a flourishing society requires more than just freedom of speech; it requires security, stability, a just legal system and a vibrant economy.

That’s why freedom of speech is not absolute. In this country, it is criminal to disclose secrets which risk the lives of Australian soldiers.

It is likewise a crime for a corporate executive to disclose market sensitive information to his mates.

The law protects us from slander and protects privileged comments made to our lawyers.

As a society, we recognise that these restrictions do not hurt our democracy or way of life. Indeed, we understand that they are necessary to maintain it. And laws against hate speech are no less necessary, because racism and bigotry tear at the heart of our social fabric.

Racism and bigotry leave people feeling exiled in their own home. They do not improve the quality of public debate, nor do they assist the wise completion of a ballot paper.

They are insidious because they attack a person because of their identity; their heritage. They imply that a person is inferior because of who they are.

Liberalism is about protecting the dignity of every individual and empowering them to reach their full potential free from discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender or sexuality.

George Brandis must realise that Section 18C stands, not as a threat to freedom of speech, but as a protector of the purposes which that freedom serves and as a guard to an achievement exceptional in this time and rare in times before.

These are the Liberal values we must defend.

The Attorney-General should walk away from this proposal.

Matt Kean is a NSW state Liberal MP and parliamentary secretary for communities.